I'm trying to upload an altered version of the above image. I'm one of the main contributors on the Jan Smuts series on en.wikipedia, but I've only just registered on Commons - therefore I get:

A file with this name exists already. You can't upload a new version because your account is too new. Please go back and upload the file under a new name. Once you've done that, you can ask someone at the Help desk to move your file to the name you want.

I have copies from 1980 of a U.S. public high school's free newspaper needed to substantiate citations in a Wikipedia article. The newspaper contains no copyright notice of any kind or statement reserving its rights as to reproduction or its desire to limit reproduction in any way. It's a legit and serious school newspaper, not a zine, and lists one member of the school's administration in its staff as "Advisor." Is such a document public domain and uploadable in its entirety? 0-0-0-Destruct-0 18:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I cannot find the exact policy page at this time, but iirc, if there is no statement or disclaimer, then it is assumed that it is copyrighted and reproduction is prohibited. I may be wrong, but I also believe that the copyright laws in many countries including the United States and those that agreed to the Berne Convention observe that basic assumption too. Zzyzx11 08:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem may be that even while the file has the .jpg or .jpeg extension, it is inf fact not a JPEG file. Or the otehr way around: it'S a jpeg, but has a different file extension. Or it was demaged/truncated during transfer (not very likely, but possible).

It would help to know what browser/version and operating system you are using, and how large the file is. It would alo help if you could upload the image somewhere else, and post a link to it, so we can investigate (or much simpler, if it'S already online somewhere, just post a link).

BTW: Please sign contributions to discussions with ~~~~ (four tilde characters); The software will turn it into a signature like mine: Duesentrieb(?!) 22:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. In fact, most licenses like GFDL or CC-by(-sa) require this. For someone elses work with (only!) this requirement, you can use {{attribution}} if no more specific tag exists. For your own work, it is recommended to use {{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5}}, that is, release it under both, the GFDL and the Creative Commons Attribtuion / Share-Alike license.

Please read Commons:Licensing carefully before uploading images; Especially note that you can only upload works that under a free license, i.e. anyone can use it for any purpose. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 00:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I have scanned an image that I'd like to upload to Commons. I'd like to find out what kind of permission I need (or if I need permission at all) to publish the image for use in a Wikipedia article. The original image is a map of mass transit in the Denver metropolitan area. The brochure that contained the image was originally sent to virtually every household in the Denver area. If it turns out that I don't need permission, can the image be set up as GFDL?

How to credit a modification of a modified map from the CIA factbook? Who's the author--the "United States"? Which one is the date? The date when the first modification or the 2nd modification were done? For a different map, can I require that a part of a map (i.e. the name of the copyright holder) must not be cropped? How? Thanks --Ibn Battuta 03:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

For the modification of a modified version: I would state authors of both modifications and dates.

You cannot require that a part must not be cropped since all licenses allowed on Commons require the right to make modifications of the work. However, you can use a license that requires attribution, see #Credit to photographer? above. --Matt314 09:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I was contacted by the administrator called "DODO" They wrote me this :

"Hi. I see you are uploading lots of images made by Ben Heine, from various sources.

You are describing them as "own work". Are you Ben Heine? If yes, how can we check that? Many of those sources are copyrighted. If Ben Heine sold theirs works to them, then the copyright owners will have something to say about this. Please take a look at Commons:Licensing and take a moment to fix the description of all the images you have uploaded. Thanks in advance. Regards. --Dodo 11:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)"

My answer : Yes, I'm Ben Heine I'm a cartoonist, caricaturist and painter (See the page on Wiki). It's the first time I'm creating pages on Wikipedia. All the images are my creations, except my portrait by Marcin Bondarowicz, but he gave me his permission to use the portrait with the chosen copyright.(He can be reached atbondarowicz@wp.pl). Is it possible to change the description of the image without having to reload them. Dodo wanted to verify my identity. Please, can an administrator contact me at heinebenjamin@hotmail.com so I could prove that I'm Ben Heine.

There seem to exist several versions of Albatross.jpg at the commons: When trying to use the picture in different Wikipedias, I end up seeing completely unrelated pictures. (Well, they all show something related to an albatross... yeah, great.) Why does that happen, and how can I use the "Albatross.jpg" of a different Wikipedia? Do I really have to re-upload a picture that is supposedly already on the commons? Thanks. --Ibn Battuta 04:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

All of those picture should be renamed to better describe of what they show. The one here might be "AICH banner albatross.jpg", the one from English Wikipedia "Steamer Albatross on the Mississippi.jpg", and the one from German Wikipedia "Albatross sculpture on Gorch Fock.jpg" --83.11.79.120 06:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

To answer Ibn Battuta's question on why this happens: the reason that the Commons version of Albatross.jpg does not show up on either the English Wikipedia or the German Wikipedia is that they each have a different Albatross.jpg uploaded directly onto those websites. As a result, they basically "block" the Albatross.jpg here. And yes, the best, fastest solution is to re-upload the picture here on the commons under a different name, one that does not conflict with those images stored locally on those Wikipedias. Good luck. Zzyzx11 08:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Yyzyx11! Two follow-up questions: How did you know that those versions exist in those two Wikipedias? (I've been looking on the Commons page for a resp. link, but haven't yet found it...) And more importantly, how should I move the "national" picture onto the Commons (i.e. without losing any information)? Thanks, --71.232.94.99 10:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

1) On the Image:Albatross.jpg page, or any other image description page, click on the "check usage" tab near the top of the page to the right of the "edit" and "page history" tabs.

2) The best way to help transfer images from a Wikipedia onto the Commons without losing any information is to use the CommonsHelper tool. It will help generate an image description, including the file history and licence, to copy-and-paste to the commons upload form.

Thanks, and how do I tell the tool that I want to get the picture from a specific Wikipedia? Or does it understand the ":[language]:[name].[file format]" format? --Ibn Battuta 21:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Under "Language code", you enter "en" for English, "de" for German, "es" for Spanish, etc. See this page for instuctions. Zzyzx11 21:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've done that... and I got the response (together with quite some text): "This image has no verificable good license, and can thus not be uploaded to commons through this tool." The picture I want to upload (or rather: get rid off in the German Wikipedia) is supposedly public domain. So what's wrong with that/ how do I enter that? Simply by hand, like I would when uploading any random picture? Thanks. --Ibn Battuta 21:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Technically and legally, you cannot paste {{PD-self}}, or even {{self}}, because you yourself was not the one that actually created the image and released it under a free license. Only the author of the image did. You have to paste another PD template, in this case {{PD-user-w}}, here on Commons instead. Zzyzx11 05:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

This should be bug, or at the very least instructions on what to do when the tool encounters { {PD-self}} or { {self}}. Zzyzx11 05:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

"visitaguayaquil" is probably "visita Guayaquil" (visit Guayaquil). As for the rest, I understand that the very illustrous Municipality of Guayaquil authorizes the use of this archive to Wikipedia according to the corresponding authorization (very literally). In other words: You'd need to know what the "corresponding authorization" is... You probably had a longer conversation with them? --Ibn Battuta 21:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone confirm that we have recieved a suitable email from Lothar Wolleh's estate for licensing the images at Category:Lothar Wolleh. This has probably been sent to permission@wikipedia.org in the last week or so, per the discussion at User_talk:Zita. If so, it would be useful to attach a copy of the licensing email to each image discussion page. -- Solipsist 19:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I searched the OTRS tickets and I couldn't find even a single ticket that matched "Lothar Wolleh". Some more information (like - what was the sender's email address?) could be helpful. pfctdayelise(说什么?) 14:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any further information on this. I'm just going on what the uploader, User:Zita, is saying - that licensing emails have been sent to permissions@wikipedia.org. -- Solipsist 12:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. They have now copied a version of the permissions to User_talk:Zita and should be sending a second copy of the email. If someone could keep an eye out for it, that would be good. I suspect the problem may not have been the 's' but rather sending to wikipedia.org instead of wikimedia.org. -- Solipsist 17:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Do items that are created or funded by state governments generally fall outside of copyright, like those of the federal government?

The particular source I'm thinking of is the STATS Indiana service [1] of the Indiana Business Research Center [2], which has a number of nice township maps that I'd like to present in articles about various Indiana counties. The center is a public information resource that receives major funding from the state of Indiana. No copyrights of any kind are given on the service's website, nor in the footnotes on the images themselves; also, I phoned one of the listed contacts at the center, who confirmed that their maps are available for public use. Before I go to the trouble of uploading a lot of stuff, though, I wanted to run this past those in the know here at Commons to verify that this kind of this is kosher.

Thanks for any input/thoughts!Huwmanbeing 23:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The works of state governments are not part of the federal umbrella of PD works and the law differs from place to place. It would appear that enwikipedia has concluded [3] that IL isn't one of the locations where state government works are Public domain. So you need to clarify what "public use" means... and figure out of they mean personal use or if the work is conformant with our licensing requirements at Commons:Licensing. --Gmaxwell 23:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Zedler threw a wobbler this afternoon while I was using the check usage function on commons to confirm usage of an image - this is what it threw back at me... Database Error: Lost connection to MySQL server during query (zedler.ts-local) - failed to connect to log database - failed to log script start! Database Error: Lost connection to MySQL server during query (zedler.ts-local) - failed to connect to WikiList database Fatal error: Uncaught exception 'MWException' with message 'failed to connect to WikiList database ' in /home/daniel/MediaWiki-live/phase3/includes/GlobalFunctions.php:668 Stack trace: #0 /home/daniel/public_html/WikiSense-live/common/WikiSense.php(158): wfDebugDieBacktrace('failed to conne...') #1 /home/daniel/public_html/WikiSense-live/common/WikiSense.php(317): getWikiListDB() #2 /home/daniel/public_html/WikiSense-live/web/CheckUsage.php(760): getLargestWikis('100000', NULL) #3 {main} thrown in /home/daniel/MediaWiki-live/phase3/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 668 - script start not logged! logging end anyway.

Could one of the seniors check this for me please? Thanks. Tmalmjursson 13:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

If anyone there can help me find Tommy Sancton I would appreciate. He's an old friend from his New York period at Time Magazine, fellow clarinetist and writer. I was still in touch with him in Paris but have now lost him. I am writing a book with a lot of jazz in it and need some critique from the master.

Looks like he's still in France. According to this site, he still lives in Paris.[4] Plays with the "Vintage Jazzmen".[5] Their latest concert was on December 3, 2006, at the Lycée du Chesnoy at Montargis in France. [6] I would try contacting the organizers of that concert at the e-mail address given at the bottom of that page, or contact the "Vintage Jazzmen" directly (e-mail given on their website, too). Lupo 13:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I use ChemDraw + Adobe Illustrator to create structural formulae of chemicals. I'm neither very familiar with those programs nor with SVGs and I have experienced some problems:

My SVGs (e.g. this) have no border around the objects so they sometimes look a little cut off at the edges.

Some people as well as me have problems watching some pictures (e.g. this). This usually seems to happen when the pictures are scaled. They just are not printed on the screen.

Is there anything I have to change in AI, perhaps the Version of SVG which it is saved to? I hope this is the right place to put my questions and I hope you can help me. Greetings, --NEUROtiker 00:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Processing AI-generated SVGs through Inkscape is a good idea in general. Take for example Image:NYCS-bull-trans-D.svg... AI (with preserve Illustrator editing checked) output a 500kb file... unchecked, it was 30k. Just opening and saving as plain SVG in Inkscape resulted in a 1kb file. – flamurai 07:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Just opening in Inkscape and saving? Isn't there any way to produce satisfying SVG with AI? --NEUROtiker 11:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I'm a newbie here. I've just uploaded this and it seems that a line with an arrow doesn's show up right like the original. Could someone help me? I made it with inkspace 4.1. Thanks. Arimasen 15:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I am User:Brookie - an Admin on the English Wiki - I have had this message posted on my user page:

Image:Tsigganes-Greek Gypsies.jpg, which had previously been deleted [1] on en.wikipedia as a possible copyright violation is now on Commons: commons:image:Tsigganes-Greek_Roma-Gypsies.jpg. Could you take a look at it? I'm just not familiar with the whole suspected copyright violation flagging procedure, especially on Commons. This image looks suspicious to me--it appears to be done by a professional, and the user who posted it, claiming it was their own work, has not posted other original photographs. Given the deletion history on en.wikipedia, it seems odd that it shows up on commons a couple of months later, uploaded by a different user. I do not find it in any non-Wikipedia context on a Google image search, however. Thanks for the help. --Cotinis 15:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Can someone look into this query? Thanks Brookie 16:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Google found it easily with the word tsigganes. A Vasilis Artikos on trekearth.com claims the photo his own. Looking at the quality of his other photos there, it's very like that it is. Also on a sister site treklens.com he has the same people a few seconds before or after. The sites say that "Photographs from the TrekEarth/TrekLens Gallery section are also protected under United States and international copyright laws and may not be reproduced or transmitted in any way without prior, written permission from the respective photographer." Since there is nothing to connect this artikos to the uploader here or on en, you can safely add the {{copyvio}} template to this image. --Para 18:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I have already sold some CDs and LPs at eBAY and would like to store the used pictures at the Commons. Is that allowed? If so, under which conditions respectively under which license is that possible? Thanks

No, Covers are usually copyrighted (not released under a free license) and could only be used under fair use. Images like this are neither allowed on Commons nor the German Wikipedia. At the English Wikipedia however you can upload them to illustrate an article of the album. --Matt314 18:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm new to your site and would like to use the image of "blasting cap" on a Web site I am creating. I don't want to violate the photographer's rights. There's a mention of a license, but I don't know what it means for my use of the photo. Could someone please advise me on whether I may use the photo and what I need to do to honor the photographer's rights under the license?

Thank you.

Norma

Hi Norma! Thanks for asking. There are a lot of different license so it dependes what the license says. I didn't find an image "blasting cup" so I cannot tell you what to do because I don't know under what license it is release.

There is an uncomplete list that tells you what to do, but it might be better to simply ask here if you just want to use a specific image. Can you provide the exact filename or a link to the specific image you are looking for? Thanks. --Matt314 19:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

She said "blasting cap", not "blasting cup". However, I can't find the file she mentioned either (see my inquiry below asking how to do a search).--Coppertwig 03:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The "gallery search" is described on Special:Search as a search of "recent" images. Is there another search that looks through all the images? I would like to just type in one or two keywords and find images; how do I do that? Thanks. --Coppertwig 04:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Instead of using the gallery search, write what you're looking for and click on search. That way you'll seek in the galleries, categories, etc. and if you scroll to the bottom of the page, you can choose Search in namespaces - if you'll mark the (Gallery), Image, Category - you'd probably find the image you're looking for.

Thank you, but I still don't quite get it. I like how the gallery search presents the results as images. The other kind of search usually presents filenames, and it takes too much time to click on each filename. Does the gallery search only search the "recent" images? Is there a way to search all images in a similar way and have them presented as many small images on one page for convenient selection? Thanks. --Coppertwig 19:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately no. :( Special:Newimages will search all images, but only their file names. To search the descriptions as well, you need to use Special:Search, which doesn't have any nice interface. You can restrict the search to the Image: namespace only, though. Look for the options at the bottom of your first page of results. pfctdayelise(说什么?) 07:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, that's what I suspected. So "Search New Images" actually searches all images. Maybe its name or at least the words "new" and "recent" on the pages talking about it could be reworded. Anyway, I'm happy with just doing the Newimages search, then. If I'm searching all images by filename, that's OK. I usually find what I'm looking for. (Images to illustrate words for the Simple English Wiktionary.) Thanks! --Coppertwig 03:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

You are right, the name is a bit misleading, but the results are in reverse chronological order, so you see the most recently uploaded images - the newest ones - first. pfctdayelise(说什么?) 06:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I found an image under flickr under what appears to be the nc-2.0 license - [7]. Originally I uploaded to it en, but it was speedied because the license says nc2.0. I didn't want to upload it here, but then I noticed that many images fall under this category - see Category:Possibly unfree Flickr images, but aren't deleted (e.g., Image:Jude Law.jpg). What's the procedure on that? Can I upload it anyway? Patstuart 02:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Those images are ones that were originally asserted to be freely licensed, either mistakenly/fraudulently by the uploader, or correctly, and the Flickr user has afterwards changed the license to something non-free. If you know from the start that the image is not freely licensed, definitely DO NOT upload it. pfctdayelise(说什么?) 06:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

You can't do it by yourself, butit is possible to ask administrators by adding a tag like {{speedy|your reason}} to it's description pages. --Panther 09:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Can a valid reason be that I no longer want my images displayed/hosted on Wikimedia Commons? How long does it take for images to be deleted from Wikimedia Commons? Ansett 09:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not a valid legal reason - none of the licenses we accept are revocable as such. It would be helpful to know why you want them to be removed. If it's because they're not actually your work and you misrepresented their origin, and therefore the licenses are invalid, they would be deleted. Other reasons are more on a case-by-case basis. We would be reluctant to start accepting "I changed my mind" as a good reason. pfctdayelise(说什么?) 07:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have some nice historical photos but I am not sure if they are PD, and if not, what copyright tag would be best (here or for en wikipedia):

scanned from book published in United Kingdom in 1915

from German postcards from 1918 and earlier (some 1915, 1914, others before the IWW but unknown exactly when)

unknown photographer, 1915

from relativly new copyrighted books reprinting photos from that period

scanned from a book published in Germany in 1936

unknown source, probably German photos from Second World War (1944)

Please let me know which if any I can upload to Commons and under what licence, and which and under what licence to en wikipedia. Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul PiotrusTalk 19:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I had problems licensing the picture Image:Gorch-Fock Figurehead2.jpg - it's simply an upload from the German Wikipedia, where it is sufficiently licenced, I just don't know what to indicate here. It would therefore help if someone could just have a quick look at the German page and tell me (or change himself) what to do... (If you need helf with the translation of the German page, I'll try to help, but there's at least one crucial word that I don't understand myself: Something regarding the complexity of the picture, which doesn't make it subject to copyright or something like that - so-called "Schöpfungshöhe")... Oh, and I've just seen that it has a "deletion" tag that will kick in today or tomorrow... so I'd appreciate of course if you could take care of it before! :o) Thanks. --Ibn Battuta 21:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

What's the problem? The image at the German Wikipedia does not have a deletion tag and never had one. It's properly licensed as PD-self over there. Use {{PD-user-w}} here. Lupo 21:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. So since the German version is properly licensed, I'd like to get the Commons version properly licensed as well. I just don't know how. (The whole point is to eventually delete the German version to be able to access a completely unrelated picture--Image:Albatross.jpg--on the German Wikipedia...) --Ibn Battuta 21:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, sorry about all those strikes, I'm stressed out and didn't check the tage before I responded. Sorry. Anyway: Is {{PD-user-w}} really the same as the German license with this "Schöpfungshöhe" stuff and all? --Ibn Battuta 21:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

PS: And what else should be written into the tag--if I apply it test-wise right now, there are some odd "author, [[:{{{1}}}:User:{{{3}}}|{{{3}}}]] at the {{{2}}} project" things going on.--Ibn Battuta 22:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I did it for you. How to use that template is explained at Template:PD-user-w. The Schöpfungshöhe bit can be ignored; it says that for images lacking sufficient originality to pass the threshold of originality, some other tag should be used. Lupo 07:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I uploaded Image:Canyon-Ste-Anne-GiantsKettle.jpg, which is an image that I did not take but found on flickr. It is licensed with a creative commons license. The license info says that the image should not be modified. (There is a link to the original w/ liscence in the text area of the image page). Is this an acceptable license for Wikipedia. Please let me know. If it is not acceptable. Please delete the image. Thanks. Sincerely, --BostonMA 15:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Commons allows only file which anybody could use for any purpose (Commons:Licensing). So no derivatives restriction is incompatible with Commons policy. Image was deleted.

We'd like to use an image of a girl with malar rash (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Malar_rash.jpg) in the online version of a new Immunology textbook that we're developing (http://www.new-science-press.com/browse/immunity). As far as I can tell, the image is free to use under the Attribution ShareAlike 2.5 license, as long as we credit the original author. My question is, how do I find out who the author is? I can't find this information anywhere on the image page! Can anyone help me?

Hello Mariam. You are right about the license and that is a good question. It may be that the image isn't really published under cc-by-sa-2.5, and in fact it could be a copyright violation. I have tagged the image because it doesn't provide source information and we can hope that more info will be provided. If not, the image will have to be deleted. -Samulili 18:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I have created {{Image permission}}, can anybody check the spelling please. Thank you. --GeorgHH 17:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Spelling seemed fine to me but I gave it a couple of wording tweaks. Looked good to me otherwise Don't forget to add it to Commons:Message_templates if it makes sense to do so! ++Lar: t/c 18:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I have created more pleasant versions of [[8]], [[9]], [[10]], [[11]], [[12]], [[13]], [[14]] and[[15]]. I tried my versions with the diagrams and they suit the rest pieces better. I couldn't upload them to those files nor download the editing program: so I uploaded them in different files : [[16]], [[17]], [[18]], [[19]], [[20]], [[21]], [[22]] and[[23]].

I wish if the new files were moved to the old files, respectively. (the W's to the w's and the C's to the z's).

How can I manage (or : how/when did I wrong ?) to get an uploaded pix at the wanted place to illustrate a Georgraphy part in a village entry ?...

You've uploaded Image:0 Paysage+Aig.jpg. You would now probably want to go to the article Saint-Martin-d'Ardèche on the French Wikipedia and include that image there. Follow the link, then click the "modifier" link in the tab at the top of the page. Then insert the following image reference at an appropriate place into the textbox (without the quotes): "[[Image:0 Paysage+Aig.jpg|thumb|Le pont suspendu près de St-Martin d'Ardèche. Le village est visible au fond, sous le pont.]]" (or any other descriptive caption, of course). A good place might be just after the line that reads "==Géographie==". Then click on the button labelled "Prévisualisation", check the page layout, modify the placement of the image reference, if necessary, and repeat until you're satisfied. Then click the button labelled "Sauvegarder". Lupo 21:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but using the guidelines on [24] and [25], there is no copyright listed on that record. Because of this, you could upload it and tag it with the {{PD-LOC}} license tag. Also make sure you also add {{LOC-image|id=fsa.8e00858}} on the image page too. Zzyzx11 06:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

i live in a rural area. a silver tabby found its way to my farm in the fall. she was starving. we adopted her, fed her, and gave her a place to sleep in our shed. She never stopped gaining weight. As a matter of fact we think shes pregnant. during really cold spells here in the midwest i have been letting her in at night to sleep in the bathroom. her body is huge and her tummy hangs to the ground. my question is, what is the gestation period and how can i identify how close she is to giving birth? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by71.157.167.150 (talk • contribs) at 14:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This is Wikimedia Commons, a free image repository. For advice on animals, you'd better contact a doctor who is specialized in the subject. Also take a look at w:Cat. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to use an image that it's used in english wikipedia into spanish wiki, but i can't. I tried to upload the file again, but it has been tagged for deletion due to licensing. It's an album cover, and i add the {{albumcover}} but nothing happens. What can i do!?

That happens, but i saw that the album cover template does exist. --MaxRey 15:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

English Wikipedia allow fair use (such as album covers) images, Spanish and Commons are not. Please don't upload album covers on Commons. See Commons:Licensing for more details. --EugeneZelenko 15:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The {{albumcover}} template redirects to {{fair use}}, which clearly states that Commons does not accept fair use. Do you find this misleading? Jastrow(Λέγετε) 09:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I read on the FAQ that depending on the license, the images here can be used elsewhere. Do the images have to be downloaded and uploaded onto my own servers, or can I use the ones hosted here? Thanks, 89.241.231.150 16:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

You should host them on your own server. Hotlinking images is considered to be bandwith theft. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a mess; I can't find anything to go through the right process to report a bad image, so I'm going to ask someone else to do it. Image:Microphone_and_cord.jpg was obviously not created over 70 years ago, and the copyright message at [27] clearly falls outside the public domain. Could someone contest this for me? Or tell me what to do? Patstuart 09:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

It's an old uploaded image which can used as PD if the author on Stock.xchng stated no restrictions. See Commons:Stock.xchng images. --GeorgHH 13:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The page you linked to doesn't support your statement. :) SXC is an ugly mess. The "no restrictions" box is used to describe some of the optional restrictions beyond the ones in their license. Best thing to do is to contact the copyright holder, but I'm pretty sure I already tried on that image back when it was on enwiki and didn't get anywhere. Couldn't hurt to try again.--Gmaxwell 21:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I have a map of London from a Meyer's Konversations publication of 1894. Am I correct in thinking that anything over 100 years old is no longer protected by copyright, unless someone bought the copyright again recently? And do you know how I can find out if somebody does own the copyright to it?

Our company MAFEM NIGERIA LIMITED are Government contractors, and are looking for reliable Technical patners in the aviation industry, particularly in the area of fire safety. We have been mandated to look for fire engines. Surfing the web, i came accross the fire engines from your site. I would however like to get the contact addresses for the manufacturers of these engines, preferably from europe.

This discussion began on Wikipedia Here, I've brought it over here as well as Commons may have some knowledge of situations like this. [29] is a website hosting old Ordnance Survey maps published up to 1940. As per OS Copyright these are now Public Domain. However the site uses both the Google Map API to display the images and also has the Creative Commons BY-NC-2.0 splashed all over it by the author. Since the maps themselves are PD, can I ignore the CC licence as it's a licence applied to freely available information and go screenshot happy ripping maps for upload?

It's difficult to understand exactly what this CC licence is applied to, the images are PD, the software used is owned by Google so cannot be CC. As far as I understand it, the website itself can be licenced but can the images?

Note. It is possible using the transparency option to remove the Google Map overlay from the site, and then with some clever editing to get rid of the rest of the blah it introduces e.g [30] and ultimately WARNING: 8meg PNG

As Megapixie stated "Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. would suggest that if the material were in the US then it would be public domain (since the work done in scanning the maps is non-creative, and thus doesn't merit copyright) however although the Bridgeman case comments that the same should apply in the UK, nobody has tested it in a court of law."

Does anyone have any experience of situations like these, where PD information is licensed? Any thoughts on these maps being able to be uploaded to Commons? Foxhill 18:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I tried to make a vectorised version of Image:Howanocarinaworks.png, but I seemingly did something wrong. So I tried to upload a better version of it, but my account at Commons is too new to overwrite the old version with a new one, so I did as I was told to: uploaded it with another filename. The new one is Image:Howanocarinaworks_language_neutral.svg, but apparently I fixed only one thing of two errors. Now I've fixed the second one, but I'd feel bad if I uploaded it the third time with a third filename. How to proceed? --Gwaur 21:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Just upload it, there is always somebody around to overwrite it. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I've transferred one image to commons respectively found the other one here marked as PD-US-Gov. I'm pretty unsure if they really qualify for this, as I cannot really see a proof for being painted by a government employee. Could someone check these too and mark them for deletion, if not appropriate? Thanks! --Svencb 02:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

To the right is Image:Rudy Giuliani.jpg displayed at 101px. To the left is Image:Rudy Giuliani.jpg displayed at 100px. The full size version of the image on the left was deleted as a copyvio months ago (it was uploaded under the belief that it was {{PD-USGov}}, but it turned out to be a state government instead). How do we get rid of this persisting thumbnail of an old image? —Angr 06:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

He's gone... I used the URL for the thumb [31] and added &action=purge. --Matt314 08:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I tried to upload new versions with the source url in the charts, but my account is too new to overfile the original versions. Also, I misnamed them as US Forest Service instead of National Park Service. Thanks. Pnw.hiker 22:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It's rather silly you cannot mark your own files for deletion, nor can you re-upload to replace a file. Blech. --Petercorless 03:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

You cannot re-upload to replace your own files because your account is too new. This is a security feature to prevent vandals from uploading vandalism-only images. Please wait about four days and this restriction will be automatically removed from your account. Thanks. Zzyzx11 19:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I just uploaded the image "WA-WRIA-map.gif", thinking it was fine to use given the copyright and permission info from the WA Dept of Ecology website, but reading about licenses here more I'm not sure. The copyright/permission info is described at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/copyright.html -- main bit: "Users may use text, images, audio, and video from Ecology's Web sites for non-commercial purposes only, provided: Users maintain all copyright notices and other notices contained therein; Users credit the Washington State Department of Ecology; and If publishing or distributing printed or electronic copies of the Material or works derived from the Material, users offer the works freely and openly to others under the terms stated here." Does this make it ok to use here or not? Thanks! Pfly 18:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Non commercial is not allowed here, see Commons:Licensing. Please tag the image with {{speedy}} and give the reason, so that it can be deleted. Note that maps are easily recreated; you might ask some vector guru on COM:VP to do it. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The image has been deleted. Clearly, the Washington State Dept. of Ecology will not allow commercial use of its content. Zzyzx11 19:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Looks like I didn't fully understand what can and can't be here, thinking it non-commercial use. Funny that states can copyright their stuff but not the federal government, it seems. Pfly 22:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

This one has been reverted by its original uploader. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, his version contains a factual error, and should be corrected. Shem 22:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Lieberman's more of a Democrat than an Independent. I'm not making a special color to comply with his ideological whims. QQQQQQ 23:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Sen. Lieberman was elected an independent, not a Democrat. While he will caucus with the Democratic Party (like independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders), he is an independent now, not a Democrat. You are editing your images according to your POV of him, which is unsuitable for Wikipedia use. I would also like to note that, on his Talk page, User:QQQQQQ has accused myself and the Help Desk of "meddling" with his image [32]. Accusations of "meddling" are counter-productive, please handle correction of your images in a more civil manner. Shem 23:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

No, just you, not the Help Desk. Seriously, are you tattling on me? Get a life. I'm not responding here anymore, but my talk page instead, if necessary. QQQQQQ 00:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

"The meddling you requested." I'm sorry you're unable to be civil ("get a life"), and insist on POV-pushing in your image creation/reverts/moves. Joe Lieberman was not the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Connecticut, nor will he be a member of the Democratic Party in the 110th Congress. You have a problem with the facts.

Also, your accusation that I asked someone to edit "your" image? When you upload content to Wikimedia projects under the GNU Free Documentation License, it ceases being yours. If you are suggesting that you have ownership over the image in question, and that it cannot be changed due to that, you're sadly mistaken. Shem 01:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The previous image had accidentally colored Accomack County, Virginia and Northampton County, Virginia (the "Eastern Shore of Virginia," [33] exclaves of Virginia on the other side of the Chesapeake Bay) the same color as the State of Maryland. Shem 19:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)